Main Menu

PS3 10 november world release

Started by Devons Daddy, 21 April, 2006, 11:49:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Devons Daddy

the word is out.
10th november is the date. worldwide, sony say they will stock pile enough units to make sure no stock problems do not occur. between now and november they say they will produce 1,000000 units a month.

but its pricey! $800 USD is being quoted,but free to play for all sony online.with biult in BLU RAY,which makes it a fair price as those sets are said to be priced at $500 each for realease.

the games catalogue at launch should be huge, and the PS3 will play PS/PS2 games with no need for patches etc.
it will also run your DVDs,
a large let down for the XBOX 360 is lack of backwards compatibility.
oh other thing,they say a PS1 and PS2 game will look incredibley better in the PS3,crisper graphics and very fast frame rate.with zero lag on older games for online.which is a winning combination.

i will not be buying at launch,but i feel that when my XBOX gives up the ghost i may be returning to sony once again.
I AM VERY BUSY!
PJ Maybe and I use the same dictionary, live with it.

NO 2000ad no life!

Art


opaque

It's never going to work at that price. When the PS2 is down to like $147 it shows the gap.
They don't need to cater for the blue-ray people they need to cater for the gamer market and I can't see, in the short term anyway, that that is that likely.

The Amstor Computer

If the rumoured $800 is true - and I do have my doubts - then I'll just be buying a Revolution this year. I have no interest in Blu-Ray - or HD-DVD - and I'm not prepared to pay a premium just so Sony can trojan horse their BR player into my sitting room.

The Enigmatic Dr X

Tumpety-tump! Tumpety-tump! (That's the sound of the band playing "Believe it if you like").

Not that I wouldn't be tempted to buy one, but I am sceptical about the release date - especially as Sony have also said they won't finish the machine until June. Reports (in Games TM this month and last month) suggest the when the machine is finished there will then be a period of debugging that lasts a couple of months. If it isn't done until June and then there's two months sorting out bugs, I'd be suprised if they could manufacture enough between August/ September and October to pack and distribute them for a November launch.

I think a Far East launch in November is more likely, followed by the US early 2007 and then Europe in mid-Spring (ie a year from now).

I'd love to be wrong, but I'm gonna be right.
Lock up your spoons!

Something Fishy

I would not believe everything you read mate.

I've been reading loads about this.

The 1 million a month is with an aim of 5-6 million units by March next year.  It looks like maybe a million to go around on launch day so dont expect to see one for a while.

Also, the back compat is by no means clear.  It is going to be via software emulation not hardware as in PS2.  The presentation on it suggested that only games not strictly meet deveopment guidelines will work "out of the box" - that is anything from 50-80% apparently.

Finally, was reading some beta test reports of people testing PS3 games.  Apparently they cannot fit it in the case as of yet (have you seen the size of Blue Ray players alone?) and it is overheating and freezing lots (though they said this might be software).

Oh an i am not going or Blue Ray until i see who wins this next gen fight (HDDVD or Blue Ray). I am not even sure either will win as it just seems too early in the high def era. So few people have hd tv's that it could be a huge folly.  It could go either way and of course , given sony history with betamax, i am not too confident in them.  The 1080P stuff to sell it is a joke as virtually nobody has such a telly yet.

I may well get a ps3 but Blue Ray means i will wait a couple of years and see what happens.

As a games console, i expect there will be some great games on there over time.




Something Fishy

that BC is going to be no better than 360.

when Xbox games work on 360 , they also look better.

Dont believe the hype though. the fact that ps3 will give them 4 X AA and run them in 480 p (as does 360) will not be as incredible as they say.

I'll say one thing, Sony can sure market themslves.

Carlsborg Expert

The daleks right.

This also follows a lot of the sales patterns since the 80's.

The Enigmatic Dr X

This is also the second or third "official" release date.

More interesting will be whether or not there are playable games at the E3 conference in May. That's the big, global, games exhibition where the products for Christmas are shown off as demos. A lack of playable PS3 stuff in May would indicate a lack of playable stuff in Christmas.

Lock up your spoons!

Bico

Fie to HDDVD/Blue Ray.

If I were a cynical man, I'd ask why DVDs need a successor so soon after their introduction.  That same me from an alternate universe would probably come to the conclusion that the companies noticed how cheap DVDs and DVD players have become of late and want another 'technological revolution' so they can go back to charging 20+ pounds for discs and 300+ pounds for a half-decent player and start raking in the cash like they did when DVDs started going mainstream in the first place.
As far as I can tell, the main selling point is higher definition and more space on the discs.  Hi-Def means you need an expensive television, and more disc space doesn't mean more movie or more tv shows on the disc, as if they put an entire series on two or three discs, they couldn't charge as much for them without most consumers getting a bit shirty - most likely you'll get more publicity puff-pieces and advertising spots to pad out the disc, if anything.
My Xbox 360 is bloody rubbish.  When I bought my first PS2, I wasn't impressed by what amounted to flashy technical demos masquerading as games, but at least I could play all my old PS1 games on it.  And it didn't keep bloody crashing and freezing mid-game, either.  Not so with 360.  Tech-demo 'games' abound, Perfect Dark is terrible, with only Oblivion in any way half-decent, and the online gaming thing I refuse to take part in - if they want us to pay a subscription for these things, they should give us the games for free, rather than cheating the gamer who just wants to sit down and unwind with a bit of carnage, instead of getting shot to bits by the Americans on Halo 2 screaming what a noob faggot you are - I'll check my fire when you grow a pair, you inbred cow-rustling colonial fucks.  (this alternate universe me is a very bitter man)

The Enigmatic Dr X

Reply,

S'odd because he sounds a bit like me in this universe.

Without the botty bothering monicker, of course.
Lock up your spoons!

I, Cosh

The main thing I agree with there is the anti online gaming bit. It seems every company and manufacturer is desperate to push it as the nirvana of gaming these days, when I really have no interest in it. As far as I'm concerned, computer games should be played in darkened rooms by solitary malcontents with poor social skills. That's the whole point.

However, games companies have clearly cottoned on to  the fact that you can charge a subscription and keep making money for years without having to worry about coming up with any new ideas.
We never really die.

Dunk!

I'd say the huge draw for games companies of online console gaming is all the retro games they can polish up and re-release for download.

Also it's almost a return to the days of bedroom coding. To create a great little shoot-em-up on X-box 360 only takes a couple of artists and programmers, so overheads are low and the game can recoup it's money in a fraction of the time that any larger product can.

Like the film industry, console games can now produce blockbusters and small independents; with them sharing the same market place rather than going head-to-head for cinemas space and our money.

No ones going to risk the 10mil+ that it's going to take to create a new product on the new systems on untried IP's. So the range of games will be sequels or adaptations of top selling genres - like the expanse of WW2 FPS's out there now.

Freed from the financial burden the innovation and creativity is going to be in the downloadable games, not what you're going to pay ?40+ (?60+ is in the pipeline) for the privledge of playing.
"Trust we"

Bico

I remember being in several Quake 3 clans on the Dreamcast, and that was quite fun - nowadays, the whole online gaming interface seems overly complicated to justify charging subscription fees.  Supposedly, the Dreamcast was a nightmare to get online, which is utter tosh, or I'd never have bothered with my attention span and technical ability - you had a cable, and one end went in the back of the Dreamcast, the other went into a phone socket AND THAT'S ALL.  No signing up with ISPs or subscription fees, and the Dreamcast was marginally more powerful than a PS2, which makes Sony's inability to get their online gaming up and running in Europe to any decent measure laughable.
The gaming revolution of the past seven years or so is down to the PS1, and the 'casual gamer' demographic - that part of the gaming audience that only wants to turn the game on, play it a bit, and then turn it off to watch Sopranos or Eastenders.  Online gaming doesn't cater to that demographic, which is why it's doomed to failure unless it chases hardcore gamers who dig RPGs and 'immersive experience' games or whatnot.
And kicks all the Americans off the European FPS groups, of course.  Wankers.

Something Fishy

crashing and freezing?

sounds like a duff one.

my first did that beforeit broke.

the replacement is both way quieter and does not do this.